CA2139367A1

CA2139367A1 - Mineral wool-free acoustical tile composition

Info

Publication number: CA2139367A1
Application number: CA 2139367
Authority: CA
Inventors: Mirza A. Baig; Michael A. Kacner; Mark H. Englert; Rajinder Singh; John C. Gaynor
Original assignee: Mirza A. Baig; Michael A. Kacner; Mark H. Englert; Rajinder Singh; John C. Gaynor; Usg Interiors, Inc.
Current assignee: USG Interiors LLC
Priority date: 1994-01-14
Filing date: 1994-12-30
Publication date: 1995-07-15
Also published as: AU692804B2; EP0663374A1; JPH07315908A; AU1005195A; US5395438A

Abstract

A mineral wool-free acoustical tile composition and the acoustical tile made therefrom wherein an expanded perlite is used as a substitute for granulated mineral wool to provide porosity and good sound absorption properties. It is preferred that the composition and acoustical tile also contain an inorganic filler to provide texturability during the manufacturing process. In addition, the acoustical tile composition also contains a starch gel binder and a fiber reinforcing agent selected from the group consisting of cellulosic fibers, polymeric fibers and glass fibers. It has been found that the mineral wool-free acoustical tile compositions of this invention have acoustical properties comparable to the commercially available cast mineral wool tiles. In addition, the mineral wool-free compositions can be used to cast an acoustical tile using equipment and procedures currently used to produce cast mineral wool tiles.

Description

A MINERAL WOOL-FREE ACOUSTICAL TILE COMPOSITION

FIELD OF THE INVENl~ON

This invention relates to acoustical tile compositions useful in manufacturing acoustical tiles and panels for ceiling applications. More particularly, this invention relates to acoustic-~ tile compositions which do not contain mineral wool. The invention also relates to a novel combination of expanded perlite, reinforcing fibers and an inorganic filler in an acoustical tile composition.
BACKGROUND OF ~HE INVENTION
A commercially successrul acoustic~l tile is marketed under the trademark ACOUSTONE and is made generally using the composition and procedures disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 1,769,519. According to the teachings of this patent, a molding composition co,--p. isi"g granulated mineral wooi fibers, fillers, colorants and a binder, in particular a starch gel, is prepared for molding or casting the body of the tile. This mixture or co.,.position is placed upon suitable trays which have been covered with paper or a metallic foil and then the composition is screeded to a desired thickness with a screed bar or roller. A
decorative surface, such as elongated fissures, may be provided by the screed bar or roller. The trays filled with the mineral wool pulp or composition are then placed in an oven for twelve (12) hours or more to dry or cure the composition.
The dried sheets are removed from the trays and may be treated on one or both faces to provide smooth surfaces, to obtain the desired thickness and to preventwarping. The sheets are then cut into tiles of a desired size.
The mineral wool acoustical tiles of the prior art, as disclosed in U.S.
Patent Nos. 3,246,063 and 3,307,651, generally used a starch gel as a binder forthe mineral wool fibers. The gel may CG-..pl ise a thick boiling starch composition combined with calcined gypsum (calcium sulfate hemihydrate) which are added to water and cooked at 180F.-195F. for several minutes to form the starch gel. Thele:..rler, the granulated mineral wool is mixed into thestarch gel to form the aqueous cG...position which is used to fill the trays.
Mineral wool acoustical tiles are very porous which is necessary to provide good sound absorption. The prior art (U.S. Patent No. 3,498,404;
5,013,405 and 5,047,120) also discloses that mineral fillers, such as expanded perlite, may be incorporated into the composition to improve sound absorbing properties and provide light weight.
It is an object of this invention to provide an acoustical tile composition which contains no mineral wool.
It is another object of this invention to provide a mineral wool-free acoustical tile composition having acoustical properties comparable to the commercially available cast mineral wool tiles.
It is a further object of this invention to provide an acoustical tile composition co...p.ising a combination of expanded perlite, a starch gel binder,reinforcing fibers, and an inorganic filler.
These and other objects will be apparent to pei:.ons skilled in the art in view of the description which follows.
SUMMARY OF TNE INVENTION
It has been discovered that an expanded perlite can be combined with a standard starch gel binder, an inorganic mineral filler for texturability if desired, and a fiber reinforcing material (non-mineral wool), to provide a dough-like composition (hereinafter referred to as a "pulp") which can be used to castan acoustical tile using equipment and procedures currently used to produce cast mineral wool tiles. The mineral wool-free pulp can be dried using less energy than employed in drying a mineral wool pulp. The dried product can be formed into tiles having comparable acoustical properties with commercially available acoustical tiles. Acoustical tiles made from the mineral wool-free pulp of this invention have acceptable physical prùpeilies for use in suspended ceiling systems.
DETAILED DESCRlPTlON OF n~E INVENTION
The mineral wool-free acoustical tile co...positions of this invention are based on using an expanded perlite as a substitute for granulated mineral wool to provide porosity and good sound absorption p.upe,lies preferably combined with an inorganic filler to provide texturability. ~hese t~,vo ingredients when mixed with a starch gel binder, a fiber reinfor~.;ng ~..ate.ial and water, provide a mineral wool-free pulp which can be cast or molded in trays using equipment and procedures currently used to produce cast mineral wool tiles.

, It has been found that a medium grade expanded perlite provides sufficient porosity and acceptable texturability. The expanded perlite material is commercially available from Silbrico Cor~.ordlion under the designation Perlite D-1. This medium grade expanded perlite contains perlite particles that are similar in size to granulated mineral wool. A finer grade of perlite (more than 60% by weight passed through a 100 mesh screen) was evaluated, but the pulps made with the finer perlite had a lower texture rating and the dried tiles showed more surface cracking. Other prope. lies such as warpage, hardness and modulus of elasticity were impro~Jed by the finer grind. The finer grade perliteparticles have greater surface area and require more starch gel binder to obtaintexture ratings comparable to the medium grade expanded perlite. In addition, the finer grade perlite increased the criticality of the fiber reinforcement relative to providing an acceptable pulp texture. The range of expanded perlite in the pulp, on a dry solids basis, may be from about 10% by weight to about 85% by weight, with the preferred range being from about 25 to about 50% by weight.
The inorganic mineral filler provides texturability. Tabular acicular gypsum is the preferred filler. Other materials, such as kaolin clay (in naturalhydrous form, or a calcined anhydrous form), Gardner ball clay, stucco (calcium sulfate hemihydrate)) gypsum (calcium sulfate dihydrate) and fibrous calcium sulfate hemihydrate (FRANKLIN FIBER filler), have been evaluated as fillers. Theevaluations indicated that the presence of a filler in the forrnulation causes adecrease in the final physical properties of the acoustical tile. The filler appeared to contribute to the formation of undesirable surface cracks, particularly in the absence of a fiber reinforcement. The filler also adversely affected acoustical properties. I lowever, the filler has a marked effect upon the texturability of the resultant pulp and is critical in providing a pulp which can be processed on equipment which is currently used to make acoustical tile out of mineral wool pulp. The tabular acicul~r gypsum filler provided a pulp which had properties most similarto a standard mineral wool pulp. Other fillers which might be used include li...es~one (calcium carbonate), Feldspar, Nepheline, talc, mica, Wollastonile, synthetic silic~tes, hydrous atumina, and silica.
The tabular acicul~r gypsum is made in accordance with the prucess disclosed in U.S. Patent Nos. 4,801,355 and 5,106,600. The disclosure in said ` 2139~67 -U.S. Patents is incorporated herein by reft:rc:nce. It is generally preferred that the inorganic mineral filler be present in the pulp, on a dry solids basis, in amounts ranging from about 10% by weight to about 60% by weight, with a range of about 35% to about 50% by weight being particularly preferred.
When the inorganic mineral filler contains water of hydration, e.g. tabular acicular gypsum, the filler may be calcined during the drying of the tile which may be carried out at 350F. If the gypsum is calcined to a hemihydrate or soluble anhydrite, the tile product may not be stable under high humidity conditions and may sag excessively.
The first step in the pr~pardlion of an acoustical tile is the preparation of the starch gel. In general, only the starch is dispersed in water, and the slurry is heated until the starch is fully cooked and the slurry thickens to a viscous gel. In the event a cellulosic fiber is used as a reinforcing agent, it may be incorporated into the starch slurry prior to cooking. The cooking temperatureof the starch slurry should be closely monitored to assure full swelling of the starch granules. A representative cooking te,-,perdt-lre for corn starch is about 180F. (82C.)to about 195F.(90C.). The starch gel binder in the pulp may range from about 5% to about 25% on a dry solids basis.
Several types of fiber reinforcing agents have been evaluated in the mineral wool-free acoustical tile compositions of this invention. In general, the hber reinforcing agents may be selected from cellulosic fibers, polymeric fibersand vitreous (glassy) fibers. Examples of cell~'osic fibers are softwood and hardwood fibers and paper fibers. Polyester fibers have been used to prepare a pulp, but the dried product was diffficult to cut and to kerf. In addition, Eglass fibers have also been used, but the prefe..ed Eglass fibers require special handling procedures. The fiber reinfcir~,ing agent is present in only minor amounts, generally ranging from about 2% to about t0% by weight on a dry solids basis. Other exa-"ples of polymeric fibers include rayons, polyolefins, polyamides, nylons, acetales and aramid fibers.
The initial development efforts to produce a starch-based, cast acoustical ceiling product without using mineral wool were directed to developing a product requiring reduced drying energy. The following formulation was developed to provide optimum texturability:

Inqredient Amount (qrams) % Solids Expanded Perlite (medium grade~ 500 42.4 Tabular Acicular Gypsum Filler 500 42.4 Starch Gel Binder 130 11 Cellulosic Fiber ~0 4.2 Water 2,500 0 The procedure used in preparing the starch-based acoustical tile was very similar to the manufacturing methods used to prepare a standard cast mineral wool tile. The reason for the similarity was the intention to use existing equipment to make the mineral wool-free acoustical tile. It was the basic cast process ~I.cr~:in a starch gel binder was mixed with an expanded perlite and an inorganic filler (preferdbly tabular acicular gypsum) to produce a dough-like pulp.
The starch gel binder was prepared as set forth above. When cellulosic fibers were used for reinfo,. e...~..l, they were incGr~ordl~:d into the starch gel prior to cooking. Mixing the cooked starch gel with the e~anded perlite and the inorganic filler is the final step in preparing the pulp. In the laboratory, themixing step was carried out in a Hobart (Model A-200) mixer. A mix time of 1 minute at speed No. 1 was determined to be suitable to attain complete mixing of all of the ing.~dierb without breaking down the starch gel and the fragile perlite particles.
Physical testing of laboratory boards was conducted accorJiny to established procedures. In most instances, three 10 inch x 3 inch sa...ples werecut from each 12 inch x 12 inch or 12 inch x 24 inch board and tested in a flexural mode using an Instron Model 1130 test instrument. Data normally measured included density (IbJft.~), the modulus of rupture (MOR) in psi, the modulus of elasticity (in psi) and the hardness (in Ibs. using the 2 inch Janka ball hardness method).
F 'e 1 A series of ;nG-Y_n C fillers were evaluated to determine which filler provided the best texturability. The following fillers were tested: Gardner BallClay; Kaolin Clay; Stucco (calcium sulfate hemi~"rd~ dle); Tabular Acicular Gypsum; and Fibrous Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate (Franklin Fiber Brand). The formulation used to carry out the evaluation was as follow~s:

.

Inqredient Total Amount (qrams) % Solids Expanded Perlite (Silbrico D-1) 500 78.4 Starch Gel 100 15,7 Paper Fiber 37.5 5.9 Filler Variable 0-300 Water 2,000 0 Table 1 Filler TyPeFiller % Densit~ (Ib./ft.' MOR(psi) Ball Clay 13.6 14.1 174 Ball Clay 23.9 14.3 148 Ball Clay 32.0 16.1 215 Kaolin Clay 13.6 13.7 151 Kaolin Clay 23.9 14.8 166 Kaolin Clay 38.6 19.1 170 Stucco 13.6 13.7 117 Stucco 23.9 16.0 110 Stucco 32.0 17.1 115 Acic~ r Gypsum13.6 14.1 150 Acicular Gypsum 23.9 15.2 146 Acicular Gypsum 32.0 16.6 133 Franklin Fiber5.2 12.7 130 Franklin Fiber9.9 13.7 115 The bbular acicular gypsum provided pulp properties most similarto those of granulated mineral wool and the best texturability.
Example 2 A variety of cellulosic fiber types were evaluated in a mineral wool-free pulp. The following cellulosic fibers were used in the pulp formulations which did not contain an inorganic filler 1) a medium wood fiber type 2) a coarse wood fiber type 3) pulped fly leaf - a highly refined bleached fiber obtaTned by hydropulping waste office paper 4) bleached softwood kraft - a long fibered, bleachtd, sofi ~ood kraft fiber The following formulation was used:
InqredientTotal Amount (qrams~ /O Solids Expanded Perlite ~D-1) 500 83.3 Starch Gel 100 16.7 Cellulosic FiberVariable 0~6.67 Filler 0 Water 2,000 0 The acoustical tiles made from this pulp formulation using the various cellulosic fibers were evaluated and yielded the following results:

Flber TyPe %FlberDenslty llb./ft. ) MOR(psi~ MOE (psi) Medlum Wood Flber 2.0 11.4 82.5 14400 Medlum Wood Fiber 4.0 11.8 107 13800 Medlum Wood Fiber 6.0 12.1 120 15 900 M~lum Wood Flber 7.6 12.2 133 16 800 Medlum Wood Fiber 10 12.4 152 17500 Coar~e Wood Flber 2.0 11.7 79.8 12000 Coar~e Wood Fiber 4.0 11.6 88.0 11 800 Coarse Wood Flber 6.0 11.7 105 13 200 Coar$e Wood Flber 8.0 11.8 112 14000 Coarse Wood Flber 10 11.9 118 15700 Pulped Fly Leaf2.0 11.4 97.8 14 000 Pulped Fly Leaf3.9 12.0 122 15 200 Pulped Fly Leaf6.1 12.0 143 16 000 Pulped Fly Leaf8.2 12.1 165 18 500 Softwood Kraft 2.0 11.2 103 13 700 Softwood Kraft 4.0 12.0 143 15400 C~
C~

~o The cellulosic fiber substantially improved the flexural strength of the acoustical tiles, particularly the pulped ny leaf and the softwood kraft.
Incorporation of the cellulosic fibers in the formulation provides a stronger and stiffer product. The cellulosic fiber also reduces or eliminates surface cracking and prc",.otes a more open and porous board which improves acoustical prope.lies.
Example 3 A comparative study was performed to determine the drying time for the mineral wool-free acoustical tile compared to a standard, cast mineral wool tile. The mineral wool-free pulp had the following formulation:
In4.~Jient Total Amount (qrams) %So~
Expanded Perlite (D-1 Med. grade) 500 42.4 Tabular Acicular Gypsum 500 42.4 Starch Gel 130 11.0 Cellulosic Fiber 50 4.2 Water 2,500 0 One 12 inch x 12 inch sample of each .naterial was dried in an oven at 300F., and its weight was monitored every half-hour until dry. The mineral wool-free pulp dried in 4.7 hours co...paled to 5.3 hours for the standard granulated mineral wool pulp. This rep.t:senl~ a 10.6% reduction in the drying time.
Example 4 In a plant trial, a mineral wool-free pulp was prepared based on a starch gel binder and containing expanded perlite, tabular acicul~r gypsum and a cellulosic fiber (wood fiber) .- inforci..g agent. The starch gel consisted of starch, wood fiber refined in a Bauer refiner, and water. The refined wood fiber was dispersed in 150 gallons (1252 Ib.) of cold water in a slurry which formed a thick suspension. The starch fiber slurry was fed into the cook tank containing 373 gallons of hot water and the gel was cooked at 194F. The starch gel had the follo~in~ formulation:
In~.- 'ie lt Solids Amount (Ibs.) % Solids Starch 207 73.7 Wood Fiber 74 26.3 Water 3,103 0 A first mineral wool-free pulp batch was prepared by feeding the starch gel into a ribbon mixer and mixing it with a medium grade expanded perlite (D-1) and tabular acicul~r gypsum, which were hand fed into the top of the mixer. The i.,gred;ehb were mixed for one minute whereupon it was observed that the pulp was too fluid. Additional perlite and acicu gypsum were added to the mixer incre---enlally and in equal pG,lions in order to produce a pulp having a consistency similar to a standard granulated mineral wool pulp. The first pulp batch was cast into tiles using a standard aluminum foil backing. A second pulp batch was prepared in a similar manner but was cast onto a white paper backing. The flnal forrnulation for these batches was as follows:
Ir-q, ~J;enl Solids Amount (Ibs.l % Solids Expanded Perlite 327 44.6 Tabular Acicul~ Gypsum 327 44.6 Starch 59 8.0 Wood Fiber 21 2.8 Water 886 0 The starch, wood fiber and water amounts were based on the addition of 966 pounds of starch gel to the mixer.
A third pulp batch was also made using the same amount of starch gel as in the first and second batches, but using additional expanded perlite and tabular acicul~ gypsum. This third batch was also cast onto the white paper bacldng. All three pulp bat- hes were dried in a kiln, and the dried acoustical tiles were fab,icated into 23.75 inch x 23.75 inch panels and tested for ph~rsical plvpe.lies. All of the panels had surface c,.-cki-.g, and creases in the backing were also observed. The physical prope,Lies were compared to standard granulated mineral wool panels as follows:
Table 4 Physical Prope.l~ Mineral Wool-Free Panels Mineral Wool Panels Density (Ib.lft.') 21.0 23.2 MOR (psi) 75.6 156 MOE (psi) 11,400 16,800 Hardness (Ibs.) 199 179 NRC (impedance tube) 0.42 0.64 lt was concluded that a mineral wool-free pulp consisting of expanded perlite, tabular acicular gypsum, fiber reinforcing agent, starch gel binder and water can be cast into acoustical tiles using the equipment currently used to manufacture acoustical tiles based on granulated mineral wool. As a result of the incorporation of additional amounts of expanded perlite and acicular gypsum, the proportion of starch binder and fiber reir~ror~i"9 agent was reduced and the physical and acoustical prope,ties were adversely affected.
Example 5 A pulp was prepared substituting kaolin clay for the tabular acicul~
gypsum as the inorganic mineral filler. The following formulation was used:
In~redient Dry Amount (qrams) % Solids Expanded Perlite (D-1) 600 41.7 Kaolin Clay 600 41.7 Starch 168 11.7 Cellulosic Fiber (bleached softwood kraft) 70 4.9 Water 3,800 0 Physical testing was performed accGrJing to established laboratory procedures. Four 10 inch x 3 inch samples were cut from the dried board and tested in a flexural mode using an Instron Model 1130 instrument. The results were compared to a laboratory-made, granulated mineral wool tile as follows:
Physical Property Mineral Wool Tile Mineral Wool-Free Tile Density (IbJft.') 22.1 17.3 MOR (psi) 222 239 Hardness (Ibs.) 256 185 NRC (impedance tube method) 0.~5 0.60 In small scale fire resistance testing, the mineral wool-free tile containing the kaolin clay provided substantially better fire resistance properties compared to the mineral wool tile.
It had previously been observed that when the mineral wool-free pulp was cast on an aluminum foil backing, the tile tended to puff" during drying, i.e. the build-up of pressure within the board caused a splitting along the midline of the panel. It was found that this problem could be 21~9367 overcome by incorporating a surfactant into the pulp composition which increases the rate of drying. Examples of surfactants which are effective in these co,..posiliGris are the following: Polyoxyethylene (20~ sorbitan monolaurate; Polyoxyt:tl"~lene (14) monolaurate; Polyoxyethylene (23) monolaurate; Polyoxyethylene (45) monolaurate; Polyoxyethylene glycol (20) monolaurate; Clycen~l monooleate; Sorbitan monolaurate; Olefin sulfonate; Aliphatic sulfonate; Aliphatic sulfate; Aliphatic carboxylate.
Example 6 This example de---on~l.dtes the effectiveness of incorporating a surfactant into the pulp. The following formulation was used both with and without surfactant:
InqredientAmount (qrams) Amount (qrams) Expanded Perlite 250 250 Tabular Acicular Gypsum 50 50 Cellulosic Fiber 25 25 Starch Gel 70 70 Water 1,350 1,350 Surfactant (polyoxyethylene (20) 3 0 glycol monolaurate) The pulp formulations with and without surfactant were cast into trays having an aluminum foil backing and then dried in an oven at 350F.
(177C.). The tile without surfactant showed severe puffing and required 7.9 hours to dry. The tile with surfactant showed no puffing and dried in 5.6 hours.
Example 7 Mineral wool-free acoustical tiles were prepared from compositions which did not contain an inorganic filler. The starch gel was prepared by dispersing the starch in 125 gallons of cold water and then adding this solution to 430 gallons of hot water (210F.) in a cook tank. The starch was cooked to 194F., afl~r~Yhich, the surfactant (Magrabar VS 100) was added to the starch gel which had the following formulation:

In-"edienl Total Amount (Ibs) Starch 257 Surfactant (Magrabar VS 100) 6 Cold Water 1,043 Hot Water 3,589 A first pulp batch was p-tpared by transferring the starch gel into a ribbon mixer and mixing it with cellulosic fiber for about 15 minutes.
Then a medium grade expanded perlite was added to the mixer and mixed for one minute. Ther~:dtl~r, the pulp was cast onto trays using a standard aluminum foil backing and was textured using a screed bar to produce a fissured texture. Two additional pulp batches were similariy produced but a screed bar providing a smooth texture was used. All of the tiles were dried in a kiln at 350F. for 12 hours.
The pulp for the first and second batches had the fol1Owing formulation:
InqredientTotal Amount (Ibs.) % Solids Expanded Perlite (D-1)300 71.4 Cellulosic Fiber (paper) 29 6.9 Starch~ 89 21.2 Surfactant~ 2 0.5 Water^ 1,602 ~based on the addition of 1693 Ibs. of starch gel to the mixer.
The third pulp batch had the following formulation:
I.. c~fe.lieut Total Amount (Ibs.) % Solids Expanded Perlite (D-1)240 71.4 Cellulosic Fiber ~paper) 23 6.9 Starch~ 71 21.1 Surfactant~ 2 0.6 Water~ 1,277 ~based on the addilion of 1350 Ibs. of starch gel to the mixer.
The dried product from all ~al~,h~.s had very slight surface cracking over the entire surface of the tiles. The tiles exhibited a significant amount of negative warpage but had very good acoustical properties.

Example 8 Two pulps were prepared using a polyester fiber (1/4 inch length) reinforcing agent. Some of the expanded perlite was replaced with a tabular acicular gypsum filler. Either polystyrene beads or polyvinyl alcohol foam were used to i"-pn~ve acoustical performance. These acoustical enhancers may be present in amounts up to about 5% by weight. One starch gel contained a surfactant (~1~9. dbar VS 100) which was added to the cook tank after the starch was cookerl The starch gel was delivered into the ribbon mixer and then the polyester fibers were added. It required about 2 minutes to disperse the fibers in the gel. The balance of the solids (acicular gypsum, e~.anded perlite and poly~ly.ene beads) were hand fed to the mixer and were mixed for about one minute. The second pulp batch was made in a similar manner, though no surfactant was added to the starch gel and a polyvinyl alcohol foam was used instead of polystyrene beads. The PVA foam was added last, and after it was added, the pulp was mixed for only 5 seconds in order to l.,ai"tdin the foam bubbles.
The following formulation was used for the first pulp:
Inq.ed.ent Total Amount (Ibs.~ % Solids Expanded Perlite (D-1) 210 39.0 Tabular Acicular Gypsum 200 37.2 Starch 97.2 18.1 Su.rd..tdrlt (''-~, abar VS 100) 1.2 0.2 Polyester Fiber (Trevira 101) 23 4.3 Polystyrene Beads 6.6 1.2 Water (in starch gel) 1,352 .~

The second batch forrnulation was as follows:
I,-qredient Total Amount (Ibs.) % Solids Expanded Perlite (D-1) 210 41.9 Tabular Acicular Gypsum 200 39.9 Starch 70.4 14.0 Polyester Fiber (Trevira 101) 20.5 4.1 Polyvinyl Alcohol Foam 0.4 0.1 Water (in foam) 3.75 Water (in starch gel) 980 The surface of the dried tiles were free of surface cracks, and none of the tiles had channeling on the back even though they were cast on standard aluminum foil bacAing. The results of the evaluations, co"~paled to mineral wool acoustical tiles, are set forth in the following table:
Table 8 Mineral Propert~r Pulp #1 Pulp #2 Wool Tile Thicl~l.ess (inches) 0.786 0.807 0.709 ~"
Density (Ib.lft.') 14.3 15.9 24.2 MOR (psi) 151 189 239 Ball Hardness (Ibs) 133 193 234 NRC (Impedance Tube) 0.59 0.57 0.58 Both pulps exhibited pro,,.isilly acoustic~l and pl,~ical p.upe.lies.
Example 9 A series of mineral wool-free aco-ssfic~' tiles was prepared using glass fiber n:inro~,in9 agents. Glass fiber diameter and length were evaluated. The glass fibers were provided by Owens Corning Fiberylas and were identified as follows:
Ex.9-1 Ex.9-2 Ex.9-3 Ex.9 4 Dia,.,eter (",icruns) 9.0 9.0 7.5 7.5 Sizing 691 691 691 691 Moisture Content 20% 20% 20% 20%
Chop Length (inches) 1/8 114 118 114 Each of the four glass fibers were slurried in the same way. Water (82.5 Ibs.) was placed into a 5 gallon container and heated to 120F. with steam. Then the glass fibers (25.5 Ibs.) were slowly added to the warm water. The glass fibers were allowed to soak in the warm water for several minutes and then the slurry was gently mixed. The glass fiber slurry was then mixed into the starch gel in the ribbon mixer for one minute, afterwhich the other solids were added and mixed togetl,er to make a pulp.
The glass fiber slurry contained a surfactant (sizing agent) and no additional surfactant was added.
The first pulp batch (ex. 9-1) had the following formulation:
Inqredient Wet Amount (Ibs.) Drl~ Amount llbs.) %9ofds Starch Gel (6.4% starch) 1,250 80 15.9 Glass Fiber Slurry 108 21.3 4.2 Expanded Periite (D~ 195 38.8 Tabular Acicular Gypsum - 200 39.8 Polystyrene Beads - 6.6 1.3 The other pulps (Ex. 9-2, Ex. 9-3 and Ex. 9-4) contained the same ingredients in the same amounts except for the starch gel. Ex.9-2 contained 1200 Ibs. (wet amount) of the 6.4% starch gel, and Ex. 9~ and Ex. 94 contained 1225 Ibs. (wet amount) of the 6.4% starch gel. Each pulp was cast in trays having a standard aluminum foil bacl~iny. The pulps were textured with a screed bar to provide the tile with a smooth surface. They were dried in a kiln for 12 hours at 300F.
The four pulp batches were tested as acoustical tiles and compared to a commercially available mineral wool acoustical tile. Trial samples were cut in both the machine and cross machine direction, desiy.ldted MD and CMD fespe~ ely. Three 10 inch x 3 inch test pieces were cut from each of 6 different panels. The results for the test sa"lples cut in the machine direction and broken across the machine direction were as follows:

Property Ex. 9-1 Ex. 9-2 Ex. 9-3 Ex. 9-4Mlneral Wool Tlle Thickness (Inches) 0.888 0.848 0.827 0.7880.862 Density (Ib./ft.') 12.7 13.2 13.4 12.2 22.4 M.O.R. (psl) 95 113 123 124 168 M.O.E. (psi) 17,000 23,500 27,800 26,00029,200 Ball Hardness (Ibs.) 85 88 87 81 NRC (Impedance tube) 0.61 0.61 0.67 0.64 0.68 The results for the test samples cut across the machlne dlrection and broken along the machlne dlrectlon were as follows:
Property Ex. 9-1 Ex. 9-2Ex. 9-3 Ex. 9-4 Thlckness (In.) 0.873 0.814 0.850 0.780 Denslty (Ib./ft.J) 12.8 13.4 13.5 12.3 M.O.R. (psl) 73 70 76 86 M.O.E. (psi) 14,800 17,40020,700 18,500 Ball Hardness (Ibs.) 82 90 89 79 All of the formulatlons textured well on the production line. There were no problems In disperslng the glass fibers. The tlles exhlbited good physical and acoustical properties.
Having completely described this inventlon, what Is clalmed Is:

Claims

1. A wetted, mineral wool-free pulp composition suitable for making acoustical tiles comprising at least about 35% by weight on a dry solids basis of expanded perlite, at least about 5% by weight on a dry solids basis of a starch gel binder, and at least about 2% by weight of a fiber reinforcing agent selected from the group consisting of cellulosic fibers, polymeric fibers and glass fibers.

2. The composition of claim 1 which also contains a surfactant to increase the rate of drying.

3. The composition of claim 1 which also contains on a dry solids basis from about 10% by weight to about 60% by weight of an inorganic mineral filler.

4. The composition of claim 3 in which the inorganic mineral filler is selected from the group consisting of tabular acicular gypsum, kaolin clay, ball clay, stucco and fibrous calcium sulfate hemihydrate.

5. The composition of claim 4 which contains up to about 5%
by weight of an acoustical enhancer selected from polystyrene beads and polyvinyl alcohol foam.

6. The composition of claim 4 in which both the expanded perlite and the inorganic mineral filler range from about 35% to about 50%
by weight of the composition on a dry solids basis.

7. The composition of claim 6 in which the inorganic mineral filler is tabular acicular gypsum.

8. The composition of claim 7 in which the fiber reinforcing agent is cellulosic fibers.

9. The composition of claim 7 in which the fiber reinforcing agent is glass fibers.

10. The composition of claim 9 which contains up to about 5%
by weight of an acoustical enhancer selected from polystyrene beads and polyvinyl alcohol foam.

11. A dry mineral wool-free acoustical tile comprising at least about 35% by weight of expanded perlite, at least about 5% by weight of a starch binder, and at least about 2% by weight of a fiber reinforcing agent selected from the group consisting of cellulosic fibers, polymeric fibers and glass fibers.

12. The acoustical tile of claim 11 which also contains from about 10% by weight to about 60% by weight of an inorganic mineral filler.

13. The acoustical tile of claim 12 in which the inorganic mineral filler is selected from the group consisting of tabular acicular gypsum, kaolin clay, ball clay, stucco and fibrous calcium sulfate hemihydrate.

14. The acoustical tile of claim 13 which contains up to about 5%
by weight of an acoustical enhancer selected from polystyrene beads and polyvinyl alcohol foam.

15. The acoustical tile of claim 13 in which both the expanded perlite and the inorganic mineral filler range from about 35% to about 50%
by weight of the composition.

16. The acoustical tile of claim 15 in which the inorganic mineral filler is tabular acicular gypsum.

17. The acoustical tile of claim 16 in which the fiber reinforcing agent is cellulosic fibers.

18. The acoustical tile of claim 16 in which the fiber reinforcing agent is glass fibers.

19. The acoustical tile of claim 18 which contains up to about 5%
by weight of an acoustical enhancer selected from polystyrene beads and polyvinyl alcohol foam.

20. A dry mineral wool-free acoustical tile comprising about 40%
by weight of expanded perlite, about 40% by weight of tabular acicular gypsum, about 15% by weight of a starch binder and about 5% by weight of a glass fiber reinforcing agent.